March 31, 2009

Mindful Eating, Mindless Sex

Imagine inviting some new neighbors to a dinner party. The first couple tells you they’d love to come. But, they warn, they think it’s immoral to eat animals, so please—vegetarian options only.

The second couple also wants to come, but—they’re almost embarrassed to mention it—they only eat locally grown food. No strawberries from Chili, or shrimp from Asia. Importing food from faraway countries damages the environment, they explain.

Couple number three also wants to attend—but, they ask, you aren’t serving genetically enhanced vegetables, are you, or meat produced by industrialized breeding practices?

At this point, you might be tempted to cancel the party and go out for a cheeseburger, followed up by a banana split—made with bananas from Ecuador. But you might wonder, as you bite into that greasy hunk of beef, just why it is that people have become so moralistic about food. Especially when so many are immoral in other areas—like their sex lives.

One person who has wondered about this is Mary Eberstadt, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. In her article “Is Food the New Sex?,” Eberstadt notes that food is cheap and plentiful in the West. The same can be said for sex. Technology has tamed many of the dangers associated with sex, like pregnancy and disease. Moreover, social and religious strictures have all but disappeared.

Which leads to an interesting question: What would happen, Eberstadt wondered, when, “for the first time in history . . . [people] are more or less free to have all the sex and food they want?” Would they pursue both food and sex with equal ardor?

Oddly enough, they don’t. Instead, many engage in a sexual free-for-all—but put stringent moral strictures on anything to do with food. A modern young woman might think nothing of living with several different men, and having abortions when she gets pregnant. But she would not dream of eating anything from a factory farm. That would be immoral. . . (continue reading)

Wait. Before I tell you who won, let me first offer my hearty thanks to all of you fine people who proposed a caption for the picture of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton being shown an image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico last week. Over 130 entries were registered, which was awesome.

Secretary Clinton's encounter with this image ocurred not long before she accepted an award from Planned Parenthood for her "contributions to the advancement of women's health care through [her] work promoting prevention and family planning" [which is code for contraception and abortion, dontchyaknow]. Watch the video of that infernal spectacle here, if you can stomach it.

This is the picture I asked you to caption (not the one above). The winner and the runners up are those who, in my subjective judgment, best and most cleverly captured the ironic weirdness of the scene: a woman who has made a lucrative career for herself as an implacable foe of the Pro-life movement (and, more fundamentally, a foe of all the unborn children who have been, are being, and will be slaughtered through abortion, as the result of her efforts to support it) being shown the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the mother of Life Himself.

There's no need for me to editorialize further on this bizarre juxtaposition of Truth and error, light and darkness, goodness and evil, which is represented by these two very different, diametrically opposed women.

The winner of this caption contest will receive a personally inscribed copy of my book 150 Bible Verses Every Catholic Should Know.

BillyHW — "Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. Then being with child, she cried out in labor and in pain to give birth. And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon...well, I don't want to ruin the ending for you."

Second Runners Up (3-way tie)

Catholic Audio — "And this is the Protectrix of the Unborn. Wait...where are you going?"

Ileana — "You see Madam Secretary, THIS is the real First Lady."

Costa Adamopoulos — The former First Lady meets the eternal "First Lady."

Third Runners Up (2-way tie):

Andre — And in this corner, Our Lady of Guadaluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuupe! Lllllet's get ready to rumbllllllllllllllllle!!!! (My money's on the lady in blue...)

Jean M. Heimann — "Here we have Our Lady of Guadalupe -- protectress of the unborn -- someone you will never have to compete with for an award from Planned Parenthood."

Our Family — "You see Mrs. Clinton, She will be the one that will defeat the abortions in your country"

The Mighty Favog — "How quaint, these Mexicans. Remember, keep smiling. Smile . . . smile . . . smile. Surely, these Catholics can't believe in such superstitious hogwash. Am I still smiling? Keep smiling, I'm a diplomat now. I fake it when I'm in public with Bill, I can fake it now. They really BELIEVE this crap? Smile . . . smile. What if there IS something to this stuff? Smile . . . smile. Please let there be nothing to this stuff. Is the smile holding up? S'alright? S'alright."

I watched this movie on my interminably long flight to Tokyo a couple of weeks ago and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. Given all the media hype surrounding its recent release, I had assumed it would be just another glitzy waste of time (or worse). But, as I discovered, that was a misapprehension. "Slumdog Millionare" actually has a powerful, positive message. To add some perspective, here's a bit of insightful commentary on the movie by Father Robert Barron (courtesy of our friends at Creative Minority Report).

And if you've seen the movie, I'd be interested in your reactions to it, positive, negative, or indifferent.

Fr. Jason Vidrine, a priest of the Diocese of Lafayette, Louisianna, has composed the following beautiful prayer for priests, invoking the special intercession of St. John Vianney. My suggestion is that you print this out and post it in your workspace or kitchen or some other place where you'll see it each day, and pray it fervently for the sake of our beloved priests.

— Patrick

DEAR SAINT JOHN VIANNEY,your childhood dream was to be a Priest,to win souls for God.You endured years of toil and humiliationto attain the Priesthood.You became a priest truly after God's own heart,outstanding in humulity and poverty;prayer and mortification.Totally devoted to the service of God's people.The Church has exalted you as modeland patron saint of all Parish priests,trusting that your example and prayerswill help them to live upto the high dignity of their vocationto be faithful servants of God's people,to be perfect imitators of Christ the SaviourWho came not to be served but to serve,to give His Life in ransom for many.

Pray that God may give to His Church todaymany more priests after His own Heart.Pray for all the priests under your patronage,that they may be worthy representativesof Christ the Good Shepherd.May they wholeheartedly devote themselvesto prayer and penance;be examples of humility and poverty;shining modelss of holiness;tireless and powerful preachers of the Word of God;zealous dispensers of God's Grace in the Sacraments.May their loving devotion to Jesus in the Eucharistand to Mary His Motherbe the Twin Fountains of fruitfulness for their ministry.

Suddenly, it's 100 years from now—the late 21st century. You can see the Catholic Church's condition as it could be when your great-grandchildren are adults. What will it be like?

These three fictional scenarios reveal what we Catholics can do today to avoid grave difficulties down the road. If you think the age of martyrs has long since passed, think again. The future of the Church might well be dangerous, bloody, and grim, or it could be one of glorious serenity and holiness, or it could be something quite different altogether.

The following "documents" present scenarios for the Church as it might become a hundred years from now. The author wishes to point out to the reader that, given the complexity of factors in the present world, many other situations could develop. But the following suggest three which are not beyond the realm of possibility.

The first: The Catholic Church is undergoing a worldwide persecution, during which the strengths of the Body of Christ are in full flower under conditions of extreme stress.

The second: A worst-case scenario, in which the Church, especially in North America and Europe, has been largely compromised, has grown lukewarm and has made a false peace with the spiritus mundi.

The third: After a delay of a century, a grace period brought about by the "New Evangelization" of Pope John Paul II, the Church has succeeded in bringing the gospel to the entire world. However, once again the secular order has begun to degenerate into universal materialism. The Church, having made many gains and suffered some losses, now faces a situation strikingly similar to that of the late 20th century. ( Continue reading.)

March 29, 2009

Here are the answers to five common arguments Protestants often give for rejecting the seven Catholic Deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament.

People don't talk much about the deuterocanon these days. The folks who do are mostly Christians, and they usually fall into two general groupings: Catholics — who usually don't know their Bibles very well and, therefore, don't know much about the deuterocanonical books, and Protestants — who may know their Bibles a bit better, though their Bibles don't have the deuterocanonical books in them anyway, so they don't know anything about them either. With the stage thus set for informed ecumenical dialogue, it's no wonder most people think the deuterocanon is some sort of particle weapon recently perfected by the Pentagon.

The deuterocanon (ie. "second canon") is a set of seven books — Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Baruch, as well as longer versions of Daniel and Esther — that are found in the Old Testament canon used by Catholics, but are not in the Old Testament canon used by Protestants, who typically refer to them by the pejorative term "apocrypha." This group of books is called "deuterocanonical" not (as some imagine) because they are a "second rate" or inferior canon, but because their status as being part of the canon of Scripture was settled later in time than certain books that always and everywhere were regarded as Scripture, such as Genesis, Isaiah, and Psalms.

Why are Protestant Bibles missing these books? Protestants offer various explanations to explain why they reject the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. I call these explanations "myths" because they are either incorrect or simply inadequate reasons for rejecting these books of Scripture. Let's explore the five most common of these myths and see how to respond to them. . . . ( Continue reading.)

March 27, 2009

This is a picture of Mrs. Hillary Clinton, the new U.S. Secretary of State, during her visit to Mexico City, being "introduced" to the miraculous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe by Msgr. Diego Monroy Ponce, the rector of the Basilica.

Caption time! And to make it more interesting for all of you, I will send a free, personally inscribed copy of my book 150 Bible Verses Every Catholic Should Know to the person who posts in the comments section of this post on this blog my favorite caption for this picture.

This contest will end on Monday, March 30th at 5:00 p.m. ET. I will notify the winner via e-mail and arrange to send the book to him or her straight away, and I will announce and post the winning caption for posterity, as well as the runners up. Please note that I will have the final, unappealable word on who wins.

An explosive set of new directives issued from Low Command (a.k.a. Hell) was recently intercepted behind enemy lines by an ace Envoy operative, whom we can identify only as “Peter Kreeft.” Our operative was able to spirit these devilish marching orders back to HQ, and we reproduce them here for you verbatim, so you can know what to expect from those on the other side of the gates of hell.

As an addendum, our agent “Kreeft” has drawn up a list of important countermeasures to be implemented immediately by all agents of the King. Needless to say, High Command (a.k.a. Heaven) has authorized these directives. Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to ensure that this dossier is delivered intact to all friends, family, co-workers, acquaintances, and total strangers within your network. This Envoy article will not self-destruct in five seconds. So, pass it around. Okay?

March 26, 2009

Margaret Sanger (1879-1966) was the Mother of all murderers, the foundress of Planned Parenthood, and an indefatigable proponent of racist eugenics policies that sought to use contraception, sterilization, and abortion as the means of depopulating those non-white ethnic groups she deemed to be "human weeds." She has the blood of millions of unborn victims of abortion on her hands. May God have mercy on her soul.

Chances are, you've heard about this wretched woman any number of times before, but most likely, you've never heard her explain, as she does in this vintage 1957 television interview with Mike Wallace, why she did what she did and how she became, as Wallace inaptly termed it, a "crusader" for birth control and abortion. By the way, note that she is absolutely in error (intentionally or not, I can't say) when she claims that, when she was getting started on her contraception-abortion jihad, there was no oppsition from "the Church," by which she means the Catholic Church, "or any church." This is false. The Catholic Church had, just 27 years earlier reminded couples yet again that contraception is wrong and that the Church continured to firmly reject it (c.f., Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii 53-62).

Watch the shadow cross her face and how she fidgets uncomfortably when Wallace asks her if it's true that her mother was born a Catholic and she admits it. The interview speaks for itself.

(Tangentially, and unrelated to Sanger's comments, a quick word about Mike Wallace's testimonial commercial for Philip Morris cigarettes — bizarre by today's sensibilities about smoking. Oddly, his clipped cadence, his facial expressions, such as the odd quick flashes of a phoney grin, here and there, reminded me less of the young Mike Wallace and more of Phil Hartman's SNL impression of Mike Wallace with a little 1976 Chevy Chase Weekend-Update thrown in around the edges.)

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new "volunteer corps" and consider whether "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" should be developed.

The legislation also refers to "uniforms" that would be worn by the "volunteers" and the "need" for a "public service academy, a 4-year institution" to "focus on training" future "public sector leaders." The training, apparently, would occur at "campuses."

The vote yesterday came on H.R. 1388, which reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.

It not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes "new programs and studies" and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 "volunteers," is the beginning of what President Obama called his "National Civilian Security Force" in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate.

WND reported when a copy of the speech provided online apparently was edited to exclude Obama's specific references to the new force.The video of his statements is posted [below]:

The new bill specifically references the possibilities "if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."

Such new requirements perhaps, the legislation notes, "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."

No one, apparently with the exception of infants, would be excluded . . . (continue reading)

They really do have a nack for producing creative, technically excellent media spots, such as this TV commercial. Only recently have Catholics (e.g., www.virtuemedia.org, www.catholicscomehome.org) started producing commercials at this high level. We can learn a lot from them in this particular area.

March 24, 2009

You know the old story about the guy who's caught in a flood. As all his neighbors are evacuating, he is determined to stay put in his house, and no amount of their entreaties can persuade him to join them in escaping the rising waters. He tells them that God will save him and, as they scram, he prays earnestly for divine deliverance.

The flood waters rise and flood his house. And he keeps on praying. Soon, rescue workers in a pontoon boat float by and urge him to jump in. He declines, saying that he is certain that God will answer his prayers and save him. Soon, he's forced to climb up onto the roof, and another boat sails over to rescue him, but he declines. He is waiting for God to act and save him. A short time later, another boat passes by, its occupants pleading with him to climb on board and head with them to safety. He refuses, determined to wait for God's response.

He is now standing on his tiptoes on the highest gable of his roof, and the flood waters are swirling around his neck. It looks like the end is near, when a rescue helicopter, seeing him in his last extremity, swoops down with a rope ladder lowered to him. The pilot calls out to him over the loudspeaker to grab the ladder and be carried to safety. But he won't budge.

"I believe that God will help me out of this danger!" He shouts back, his words lost in the din of the rotors. The helicopter pilot shakes his head in saddened disbelief and flies off.

A few minutes later, the flood waters rise over the man's head and he drowns.

St. Peter leans down toward the fellow and says, "The Good Lord sent you three rescue boats and a helicopter. What more did you want?"

That venerable adage contains a lot of truth. And while it doesn't make for an exact parallel with this video you're about to watch, I think there is enough of a connection that we should keep it in mind as we think about what things we should do to prepare for turbulent times ahead, trusting in the Lord's gracious providence while at the same time using our common sense and being prudent. Think about that when you watch this video clip of Gerald Celente's latest warning about the coming economic collapse.

I've brought you commentary by Gerald Celente on this blog before. Some of you have sent me notes to say that, as grim and frightening as his economic forecasts have been (and he has shown an amazing track record of bang-on-the-bullseye accuracy with his predictions), listening to his message has helped clarify your own thinking about what moves you need to be making now to be less vulnerable when the guacamole hits the fan.

Scoff if you like, but I seriously doubt you'll be scoffing in a year or so.

March 23, 2009

And I'm not talking about St. Maximilian Kolbe's Militia Immaculatae either. The rapid spread of what are known as "fusion centers," government-operated data processing sites (58 of which are currently known to exist across the U.S.) that use highly sophisticated data-mining programs to correlate vast amounts of personal data about U.S. citizens, are raising questions about how that data will be used. This news story is reporting that there may be evidence to suggest that completely non-violent groups, such as pro-life organizations and, for that matter, individual pro-life citizens, are being classified as potentially dangerous. See what you think:

If you're an anti-abortion activist, or if you display political paraphernalia supporting a third-party candidate or a certain Republican member of Congress, if you possess subversive literature, you very well might be a member of a domestic paramilitary group.

That's according to "The Modern Militia Movement," a report by the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), a government collective that identifies the warning signs of potential domestic terrorists for law enforcement communities.

"Due to the current economical and political situation, a lush environment for militia activity has been created," the Feb. 20 report reads. "Unemployment rates are high, as well as costs of living expenses. Additionally, President Elect Barrack [sic] Obama is seen as tight on gun control and many extremists fear that he will enact firearms confiscations."

MIAC is one of 58 so-called "fusion centers" nationwide that were created by the Department of Homeland Security, in part, to collect local intelligence that authorities can use to combat terrorism and related criminal activities. More than $254 million from fiscal years 2004-2007 went to state and local governments to support the fusion centers, according to the DHS Web site.

During a press conference last week in Kansas City, Mo., DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano called fusion centers the "centerpiece of state, local, federal intelligence-sharing" in the future.

"Let us not forget the reason we are here, the reason we have the Department of Homeland Security and the reason we now have fusion centers, which is a relatively new concept, is because we did not have the capacity as a country to connect the dots on isolated bits of intelligence prior to 9/11," Napolitano said, according to a DHS transcript.

"That's why we started this . . . Now we know that it's not just the 9/11-type incidents but many, many other types of incidents that we can benefit from having fusion centers that share information and product and analysis upwards and horizontally." (continue reading)

Even though I do like Twitter (been on it for four whole months now), not everyone does. And this look at Twitter through the eyes of those who don't like it is actually rather accurate, at least with regard to those users who really do love to answer the question, "What are doing?" over, and over, and over again throughout the day.

Needless to say, that's not how I use Twitter, and the folks who are joining my network typically do not use it that way either. But some folks surely do. And to all of them, I dedicate this little video.

March 21, 2009

One week from today, the star of [some pornographic movies] will walk onto the campus of Truman State University in Kirksville to debate a pastor on the subject most dear to his heart: porn. It will fall to the Rev. Craig Gross to rebut actor Ron Jeremy's arguments that pornography is a harmless activity that most people pursue in the privacy of their own homes. . .

The Truman State debate is just one upcoming anti-porn event organized by local Christians. Such events reflect mounting distress among Christians over pornography's growing technological reach.

From individual congregations to large organizations like the St. Louis Archdiocese, the Missouri Baptist Convention and the local stakes of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, anxious religious leaders are confronting what some call an increasingly dangerous moral threat to children and marriages.

Rick Schatz is on the executive board of the Cincinnati-based Religious Alliance Against Pornography, representing about 50 faith groups and Christian denominations.

"We've been around for 23 years, and I have never seen the level of concern among faith leaders that I have in the last year," Schatz said. "Because of the explosion in new, mobile technologies, there's a new threat level."

The AVN Media Network, which tracks the pornography industry, reported total retail sales of $13 billion in 2006, the latest year for which numbers are available. . . (continue reading)

March 20, 2009

In the early 1970s, Lutheran pastor Richard John Neuhaus was poised to become the nation’s next great liberal public intellectual—the Reinhold Niebuhr of his generation. He had going for him everything he needed to be not merely accepted but lionized by the liberal establishment. First, of course, there were his natural gifts as a thinker, writer, and speaker.

Then there was a set of left-liberal credentials that were second to none. He had been an outspoken and prominent civil rights campaigner, indeed, someone who had marched literally arm-in-arm with his friend Martin Luther King. He had founded one of the most visible anti-Vietnam war organizations. He moved easily in elite circles and was regarded by everyone as a “right-thinking” (i.e., left-thinking) intellectual-activist operating within the world of mainline Protestant religion.

Then something happened: Abortion. It became something it had never been before, namely, a contentious issue in American culture and politics. Neuhaus opposed abortion for the same reasons he had fought for civil rights and against the Vietnam War. At the root of his thinking was the conviction that human beings, as creatures fashioned in the image and likeness of God, possess a profound, inherent, and equal dignity.

This dignity must be respected by all and protected by law. That, so far as Neuhaus was concerned, was not only a Biblical mandate but also the bedrock principle of the American constitutional order. Respect for the dignity of human beings meant, among other things, not subjecting them to a system of racial oppression; not wasting their lives in futile wars; not slaughtering them in the womb. . . . (read more)

March 19, 2009

For two decades now, I have read with gusto many of P.J. O'Rourke's articles and almost all his books (Parliament of Whores, Give War a Chance, Age and Guile, Driving Like Crazy, All the Trouble In the World, etc., etc., etc.) and I, like his myriad of other avid readers, not only chortle, laugh, and wine-shooting-out-of-my-nose guffaw my way through his unrelentingly funny social commentaries (read any of the aforementioned titles to get the gist of this), I almost always learn something in the bargain.

Often, what I learn from him is deadly serious, though the man has an inimitable way of making "serious as a heart attack" themes so gol-darn funny that how he imparts serious information can be pure, unadulterated bliss.

It is, of course, always repellent to read the fine details of odious things like income taxes, crime, drug abuse, poverty, destitution, disease, horrible maimings, death, and American politics — though not when these issues are discussed by O'Rourke, the guru of gainsaying.

So, do yourself a nice favor and check out his new article “Stem Cell Sham: The President as Sophist,” a response to El Lider Maximo's recent speech in which he hailed himself for having the far-sighted courage to reverse the previous administration's (sagacious) ban on fetal stem-cell research.

You'd never imagine in a million years that this subject could be funny, and it's not. No, not even ole P.J. could make it so. Though he does do the next best thing. He shows how laughably ludicrous the rationale is that El Lider Maximo foisted on the American public for his decision. If you don't know whether to laugh or cry in reaction to the preposterously wrong positions and decisions that our newly elected Lider is making and taking, read P.J.'s newarticle and you'll know which way to tilt, at least for a little while.

and receive your free copy ($4.95 for shipping and handling) of our inspiring new booklet, Meditations on the Stations of the Cross. It will enrich your Lent by helping you deepen your relationship with Love Himself, Jesus Christ. Here is just a sample of the lovingly-crafted words and images that await you in these pages:

Meditations on the Stations of the Cross was written by Dr. Ron Thomas, Assistant Professor of Theology at Belmont Abbey College. The Stations photographed in the booklet grace the nave of the Abbey Basilica of Mary Help of Christians at Belmont Abbey in Belmont, North Carolina. Dr. Thomas is a convert to the Catholic faith after having served for 13 years as an Episcopalian priest and 5 years as a Methodist minister. He received his doctorate in theology from the University of Cambridge in England.

Our booklet is published with the permission of the Most Reverend Peter J. Jugis, Bishop of Charlotte.

and receive your free copy ($4.95 for shipping and handling), or to order multiple copies in bulk for your parish, Bible study group, or family.